Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Thursday, 06 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-12-10 allowed

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH vs SUDARSHANA CHATTERJEE

Bench: 3 — R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna, Hrishikesh Roy

In Brief

A lecturer in Anesthesia at a medical college in Uttar Pradesh obtained an appointment at a medical institute in Chhattisgarh in 2004. She submitted leave applications to her original employer seeking approval to join the new post but received no response. She joined the new institution without formal sanction while her leave application was pending, and later drew salary from both employers. Years later, after retiring from Chhattisgarh, she sought retiral benefits from Uttar Pradesh, which were denied. The High Court quashed the denial and ordered fresh consideration. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that her conduct amounted to abandonment of service and that without formal leave sanction or approval, she was not entitled to retiral benefits. The Court also set aside the High Court's direction requiring the officer to appear in person, reaffirming that courts should not summon officers merely to explain lawful orders."

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Administrative Law Civil Service Law Employee Benefits Retiral Benefits Pension Court Procedure High Court Jurisdiction

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login